The debate between digital screens vs physical books is playing out in homes and classrooms across India every single day—and most of us don’t even realise we’ve already picked a side.
But here’s the question nobody’s asking: are our students actually learning?
Because there’s a growing body of evidence suggesting that in the battle of digital screens vs physical books, how students read matters just as much as what they read. And for student wellness—cognitive, emotional, and physical—the research is pointing firmly in one direction.
Let’s look at this honestly, without dismissing technology or romanticising the past. Both sides deserve a fair hearing. But fair doesn’t mean equal, and the evidence doesn’t always land equally.
The Case for Digital Screens
Let’s be genuinely fair. Digital screens have brought real advantages to education, and dismissing them entirely would be both wrong and impractical.
Accessibility and affordability. For many Indian families, a single tablet can hold an entire library. Students in remote areas with limited access to bookshops and libraries can access millions of texts at the tap of a screen. This is not a small thing—it’s a democratisation of knowledge.
Interactivity and engagement. Digital platforms can embed videos, hyperlinks, quizzes, and audio. For certain kinds of learning—a history lesson that links to documentary footage, a science concept explained through animation—this enriches the experience in ways a printed page simply cannot.
Accessibility features. For students with dyslexia, visual impairments, or other learning differences, digital screens offer adjustable fonts, text-to-speech, and high-contrast settings that physical books cannot provide. For these students, digital reading isn’t just convenient—it’s empowering.
Currency of information. A textbook printed five years ago has outdated information. Digital content can be updated in real time. For rapidly evolving subjects, this matters.
Environmental considerations. The paper industry carries its own environmental costs. For parents and educators thinking about sustainability, digital reading has a legitimate argument.
So yes—digital screens have a real and important place in education. This isn’t a debate about whether technology belongs in classrooms. It does.
The question is more specific: when it comes to the kind of reading that builds comprehension, critical thinking, focus, and wellness in students, which medium serves them better?
The Case for Physical Books
This is where the research becomes difficult to ignore.
The “Screen Inferiority Effect”
In 2024, a meta-analysis of 49 studies found something striking: students who read on paper consistently scored higher on comprehension tests than those who read the same material on screens. Researchers have named this the “screen inferiority effect”—a consistent pattern across multiple studies showing that digital reading leads to lower information retention and understanding.
This isn’t a marginal difference. A landmark study from the University of Valencia involving over 450,000 participants found that students who spend ten hours reading physical books will likely develop six to eight times better comprehension than students who spend the same time reading on digital devices.
Read that again: six to eight times.
That’s not a subtle difference. That’s the difference between understanding something and merely having read it.
Why Does This Happen?
The science behind the screen inferiority effect is fascinating.
The brain reads differently on screens. Reading is a relatively recent development in human evolution—our brains actually borrow neural networks built for other tasks, like face recognition, to process written text. And crucially, our brains do not process text on paper the same way they process text on screens. Screen reading tends to be faster, more skimming-based, and less cognitively deep. We scan rather than absorb.
Physical books create mental maps. When we read a physical book, we unconsciously create a spatial map of the text. We know roughly where on a page something was written, how far through the book we are, what came before and after a passage. This spatial, tactile experience actually helps the brain retain information more effectively. Screens, which show only one virtual page at a time, strip this navigational context away.
Screens invite distraction. Even a dedicated reading app exists on a device that also contains social media, games, messages, and endless notifications. The mental effort required to resist these distractions—even when the student is managing to—creates cognitive load that detracts from comprehension. Research from Macquarie University found that constant multitasking on digital devices has genuinely reduced attention spans, making sustained focus on digital text harder over time.
Digital text tends to be lower quality. Online and digital content often uses informal, conversational language that doesn’t expose students to the complex syntactic structures that develop vocabulary and comprehension skills. Print content, which typically undergoes rigorous editorial review, tends to maintain higher linguistic standards.
The Wellness Dimension
Beyond comprehension, there’s the question of physical wellness.
Eye strain and sleep disruption. Screens emit blue light that suppresses melatonin production, directly interfering with sleep. For students already navigating demanding academic schedules, screen-heavy evening study habits compound sleep deprivation. Physical books, read under warm light, don’t carry this cost.
Posture and physical health. Prolonged screen use is associated with “tech neck,” eye fatigue, and headaches. These aren’t trivial complaints—chronic physical discomfort affects concentration, mood, and overall well-being.
Mental health and overstimulation. Screens don’t just show text—they exist in an ecosystem of notifications, social media, and endless content. Even when students intend to read, the proximity to this overstimulating environment creates anxiety and restlessness. Physical books provide a genuinely different cognitive experience: slower, quieter, more immersive.
Emotional depth. Research consistently shows that reading physical books creates deeper emotional engagement with the text. The immersive experience of a physical book—the weight, the smell, the turning of pages—creates a different quality of attention. This isn’t nostalgia. It’s neuroscience.
Also Read: Beyond the Report Card: Why Fiction Is Essential for Your Child’s Wellness
The Indian Context: A Particular Challenge
In India, the shift toward digital learning accelerated dramatically during the COVID-19 pandemic. Millions of students who had never owned devices found themselves learning entirely through screens. While this ensured continuity of education under extraordinary circumstances, it also established habits that have persisted long after classrooms reopened.
For many Indian students, the question of screen time vs reading books is already fraught. Children are on devices for schoolwork, entertainment, and social connection—often simultaneously, often late into the night. The average Indian teenager now spends between 6-8 hours daily on screens, combining school and leisure. Adding more screen-based reading to this mix doesn’t just raise concerns about comprehension—it compounds an already significant physical and mental health problem.
Consider what a typical school day looks like for an Indian student today: online resources for homework, digital classrooms for certain subjects, YouTube for concept revision, WhatsApp for study group coordination—and that’s before the entertainment scrolling begins. The idea that reading for pleasure can happen on the same device that hosts Instagram and gaming apps is, frankly, optimistic. Research consistently shows that even when students intend to read, the proximity of other digital content significantly undermines focus and retention.
There’s also an equity dimension worth acknowledging. The push toward digital learning has not reached all students equally. While urban middle-class students have access to high-quality devices and reliable internet, millions of students in rural and lower-income settings still rely on shared, low-quality devices with poor connectivity. For these students, physical books remain not just preferable but often the only viable option for sustained, focused reading. Ironically, the students least served by digital learning are often those for whom physical books are most consistently available—if schools and families prioritise them.
What About E-Readers?
It’s worth distinguishing between different kinds of screens. There’s a meaningful difference between a dedicated e-reader (like a Kindle) and a multi-function tablet or computer.
E-readers are designed specifically for reading. They use e-ink technology that more closely mimics paper, emit less blue light, don’t host distracting apps, and provide a more focused reading environment. Research suggests that e-readers perform somewhat better than tablets and computers for comprehension, though they still generally fall short of physical books.
For students who genuinely cannot access physical books but want the benefits of sustained reading, a dedicated e-reader is a reasonable middle ground. It’s not equivalent to a physical book, but it’s meaningfully better than reading on a smartphone or laptop.
Digital Screens Win Some Battles—But Not the War
Let’s be clear about where this verdict doesn’t apply.
For quick information lookup, digital screens are unquestionably superior. Searching for a fact, cross-referencing, or accessing supplementary material—screens are faster and more efficient. Nobody is suggesting students should stop using search engines.
For interactive and multimedia learning, digital tools offer experiences that print cannot. Science simulations, language-learning apps, and collaborative platforms—these have genuine educational value that physical books don’t replicate.
For accessibility needs, digital tools with appropriate features serve students that print sometimes cannot.
The clear winner verdict applies specifically to: sustained reading for comprehension, deep learning, emotional engagement with texts, and the kind of focused, immersive reading that builds critical thinking and wellness. In these areas—the areas that matter most for academic development and overall well-being—physical books win.
Practical Guidance for Parents and Educators
Acknowledging the research is one thing. Translating it into practice is another.
For parents:
Set boundaries around screen time vs reading books for children at home. This doesn’t mean banning devices—it means being intentional. Designate reading time as physical book time where possible.
Invest in a small home library. It doesn’t need to be expensive—second-hand bookshops, school fairs, and library memberships are affordable alternatives. Having physical books accessible makes a significant difference.
Model physical reading yourself. Children who see parents scrolling learn scrolling. Children who see parents reading physical books learn something different.
Be aware of the before-bed rule. Replace screen-based reading (or any digital screens) with physical books in the hour before sleep. The sleep benefits alone make this worthwhile.
Distinguish between types of screen use. Help children understand the difference between active, purposeful screen use (researching, creating, communicating) and passive, habitual scrolling. Not all screen time is equivalent.
For educators:
Resist the assumption that digital is automatically progressive. More technology doesn’t automatically mean better learning. Be guided by evidence, not novelty.
Where physical textbooks and books are available, use them for sustained reading tasks. Reserve digital tools for the specific purposes they serve well: interactivity, multimedia, and accessibility.
Create classroom cultures that value physical reading. Book corners, reading time with physical books, discussions about what students are reading—these signals matter.
Advocate for physical book resources. School libraries and classroom libraries are not anachronisms—they’re evidence-based investments in wellness and learning.
Talk honestly with students about this research. Older students, especially, deserve to understand why they’re being asked to read physically, not because technology is bad, but because their brains learn differently across different mediums.
The Verdict
The title of this article promised a clear winner. The research delivers one.
For sustained reading that builds comprehension, critical thinking, emotional depth, and genuine wellness, physical books outperform digital screens—consistently, significantly, and across age groups.
This doesn’t mean abandoning technology. It means using it wisely, for what it does well, whilst preserving and prioritising physical reading for what it does best.
In a world saturating our children with screens, choosing physical books isn’t a nostalgic preference. It’s an evidence-based act of care.
The report card might not measure reading habits. But the brain remembers every hour spent in the quiet company of a physical book—and benefits from it in ways we’re only beginning to fully understand.
Does your child read physical books regularly? How do you manage screen time vs books at home?
